CRM-M-14796 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 231 LAKSHMAN @ LAXMAN STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- M Mr. Jugraj Singh Chouhan, for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Ps at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala 2. On 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory petitioner in case FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala. 14796-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: LAKSHMAN @ LAXMAN Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Gaurav Vir Singh Behl, Advocate Mr. Jugraj Singh Chouhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala On 18.03.2026, the following order “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory petitioner in case FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14796-2026 Date of decision: 02.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Advocate, Advocate Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under ychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala. following order was passed by this Court: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under ychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Prayer in the present petition filed under Section bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.314 dated 14.10.2025 registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14796 14. on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, apprehended one person, namely, Anuj Verma, who was found in conscious possession of 1416 capsules of Spasmo Tad Parvion containing Trama Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co accused Anuj Verma. petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contend spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co interrogation is not ad from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. accepts notice on behalf of respondent file status report in the matter. investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to inter satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner 14796-2026 2 Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 14.10.2025, ASI Sita Ram along with other police officials was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, apprehended one person, namely, Anuj Verma, who was found in conscious possession of 1416 capsules of Spasmo Tad Parvion containing Tramadol Hydrochloride weighing 1119 grams. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co accused Anuj Verma. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused Anuj Verma. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent file status report in the matter. Adjourned to 02.04.2026. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 10.2025, ASI Sita Ram along with other police officials was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, apprehended one person, namely, Anuj Verma, who was found in conscious possession of 1416 capsules of Spasmo Tad Parvion dol Hydrochloride weighing 1119 grams. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co- Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He s that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Anuj Verma. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co-accused during his custodial missible. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and seeks time to In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 10.2025, ASI Sita Ram along with other police officials was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, apprehended one person, namely, Anuj Verma, who was found in conscious possession of 1416 capsules of Spasmo Tad Parvion dol Hydrochloride weighing 1119 grams. - Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He s that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Anuj Verma. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that accused during his custodial missible. No recovery is to be effected submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab State and seeks time to In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14796 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in co with the order dated the investigation. the petitioner and implicated only 4. Learned counsel for the State, Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. 5. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recove contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either the offence or the recovered contraband. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties available record. 7. Further, grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment 14796-2026 3 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in co the order dated 18.03.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation. He has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner and the co-accused and that implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statement Learned counsel for the State, on instructions of ASI Taljinder has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further custodial interrogation. H since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought ended the concession of anticipatory bail. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recove contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either the offence or the recovered contraband. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties available record. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between that the petitioner is sought to be disclosure statement of the co-accused. on instructions of ASI Taljinder has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation in terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner and is no longer He has however submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought ended the concession of anticipatory bail. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section mpliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be on instructions of ASI Taljinder in terms and is no longer submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been red contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either and perused the he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14796 titled as ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegati Post) was recovered from the co concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prose allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of." 8. In the present case also, t solely on the basis of say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the co-accused will be subject to comprehe trial and the same cannot anticipatory bail to the petitioner investigation in terms of interim 9. In view of the above, order dated 18.03.2026 14796-2026 4 ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to l (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of." In the present case also, the petitioner is sought to be arrayed he basis of the disclosure statement of the co say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the accused will be subject to comprehensive scrutiny during the course of the same cannot by itself be a ground to decline the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, especially when he has joined the investigation in terms of interim order/protection granted by this C In view of the above, the petition is allowed and 18.03.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to l (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ has held as under: "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. ons in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co-accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co- accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the cution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending he petitioner is sought to be arrayed disclosure statement of the co-accused. Suffice to say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the nsive scrutiny during the course of the be a ground to decline the concession of especially when he has joined the protection granted by this Court. the petition is allowed and the interim is made absolute. The petitioner ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. ons in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda accused. The petitioner - accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the cution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending he petitioner is sought to be arrayed accused. Suffice to say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the nsive scrutiny during the course of the be a ground to decline the concession of especially when he has joined the the interim is made absolute. The petitioner GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14796 shall continue to join investigation as and when Officer and shall also abi 482(2) of the BNSS. 10. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. 02.04.2026 Gurpreet 14796-2026 5 shall continue to join investigation as and when Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No shall continue to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating de by the conditions as provided under Section Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE speaking/reasoned? Yes/No by the Investigating de by the conditions as provided under Section Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.